Tresmond says his client once took a prescribed medication for his anxiety but he is not mentally ill. The Amherst man ended his prescription use within the last year.

"He is a law-abiding citizen, no record. He is a stellar member of the community, I would say. Not an ex-felon. He is one of the nicest young men I have met in a long time," Tresmond said.

Officials confirmed state law permits the suspension of a gun permit before the permit holder even gets a chance to state their case.

We have not been able to reach State Police to comment on this case but we do know Erie County officials have only taken action against one pistol permit holder on mental health grounds since the SAFE Act was passed last month.

I KNOW there are many lawmakers that take Xanax, Ativan and other Benzodiazapenes to relax, while flying, or to help them sleep. Add Ambien into the mix because it makes some people do weird things (supposedly, or as his excuse, that’s why that one Kennedy crashed his car) and the NY state Assembly, Senate, Governor and probably US House and Senate members need to turn in all their weapons. I even remember Colin Powell and Hillary talking about taking Benzos or Ambien to try and get enough sleep when constantly traveling. Wish I could remember the link. This is BS. You don’t just give Xanax or the like to seriously mentally ill people that are going to shoot people, if you do that’s malpractice.

Does the man get his guns back upon satisfying the requirements for gun ownership (I can’t believe I am asking this question)? Or, do they run their police cars over the barrels and render them destroyed.

7
posted on 04/09/2013 9:59:33 PM PDT
by jonrick46
(The opium of Communists: other people's money.)

To take Xanax for Anxiety you have to understand some basics. It doesn't take a maximum dosage to work. For a man lets say 200 pounds .5mg {a half a mg} three - four times a day suffices. 2MG twice a day is not going to work but 12 out of 24 hours in a day.

I'm an 18 year G.A.D patient due to Vestibular and Optic sensory processing disorders. I'm an 18 year user of Xanax. My wife is a 28 year user of Xanax for Anxiety. An antidepressant for someone with this type of General Anxiety Disorder can have bad results. I've seen the worse an antidepressant can do to someone short of death. It happened to my wife when a doctor tried her on antidepressants.

My medical records and hers have Allergic to Antidepressants in them. Ironically Benzodiazapenes is the protocol antidote to stop an adverse reaction antidepressants can cause called Serotonin Syndrome.

10
posted on 04/09/2013 10:07:26 PM PDT
by cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)

Well, ladies and germs, that IS the point of gun registration, background "checks" and gun permits each and every time a gun is purchased. In North Carolina, a form has to be filed with the sheriff's office with a fee paid, waiting time for its approval, a background check and THEN you are approved to buy a gun. BUT WAIT!...you go to the gun store, present your permit and they sell you a gun after more forms are completed, BUT...if you change your mind and decide later you want to return the gun and get a different one, you cannot reuse the original permit. A new one must be filled out at the sheriff's office, another fee paid and all the checks redone!

Our local gun store even said that if I came in with my husband, who has a CCP (which, if you have a concealed carry permit, you don't need a new separate permit for new gun purchases), and he bought a gun and turned to me - in the store - handed me the gun and said, "Happy birthday, honey!", the store would have to cancel the sale. They are not allowed to let that happen. There's nothing they can do if he waits until we get in the car to give it to me, but they could be put out of business if they knowingly allowed someone to buy a gun for another person who doesn't have a permit.

What the dorks can't seem to understand is that criminals NEVER get a gun the legal way. Law-abiding, regular citizens are the ones who get prevented from being able to defend themselves, their families and homes. Now, it looks like people who take certain medications either currently or in the past are being denied the right to own a gun. If I were that guy, I would NOT have turned in my guns! Allowing the state to have that kind of power over the citizen is tantamount to tyranny! One day it's possible mental issues due to medication and the next day it's religious beliefs. It won't be long before NOBODY (legal, that is) will be allowed to have a gun. Is that what we really want?

13
posted on 04/09/2013 10:16:47 PM PDT
by boatbums
(God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)

To be fair (why?!!??) to criminals, I can’t think of a bank robber, or home invader are known to have done mass shootings of innocent people. The shooter in colorado was a university student. Columbine shooter was a high school student. Virginia Tech was another student. The most recent mass shooting at Sandy Hook was a 20 year old with mental problem. The person who shot the congresswoman did not have a criminal record using guns. Even the Jihadist Muslim who shot soldiers in a military base was not a bank robber type criminal.

It is obvious mental problem is what causes mass murders with guns. It will be impossible to weed out every mental candidate in country by background checks.

The only solution which will work is more people with CCP’s and trained guards/teachers at schools.

15
posted on 04/09/2013 10:48:30 PM PDT
by entropy12
(The republic is doomed cuz people have figured out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)

This is pure bullcrap! I use a .25 occasionally .5 Xanax to help me rest now and then due to a sleep disorder and I’ll be damned if they want to take away my guns because of it! That is discrimination, period. I would venture to guess that half the population is on some kind of mood enhancer whether it be anti-depressants, anti-anxiety, alcohol, caffeine, nicotine etc. People are not going to be perfect, ever, and the second amendment was not made with “perfect” people in mind either.

This case could be the opening gun-owners are looking for re a test case about the use of certain types of perscription drugs.

I can see s whole battery of pharmacists and doctors on the witness stand explaining the whole gamut of mental problems and illnesses, as well as pharmocology to the judge and jury and the public.

It is a matter that needs to be brought out into the open so that a serious debate can be started on what kind of mental conditions and what kind of drugs can be dangerous re someone who owns a firearm, and which ones are not.

Also, how much time is involved in someone resolving their mental issues and getting off of the drugs involved.

If our side plays it cards right, it will be able to educate the whole illiterate country as to what is real and what is false.

The meds which come under fire most often are SSRIs (Selective Seratonin Reuptake Inhibitors) which are something people shouldn't just quit, but should taper off usage under a physician's supervision.

Whether the involvement of patients in mass shootings who have taken these or were taking them at the time of the shooting is coincidental (correlation) or whether the medication contributed directly or indirectly (causation) to the mental state of the shooters is something which should be investigated. The consistent presence of those medications in the pharmacological history of the shooters raises valid questions.

Should all psychoactive drug history be considered a disqualifier for firearms ownership? Probably not, but whether the meds are to blame or the condition which led to their prescription is, it is a flag for the moment.

This is one of the problems with blanket policies--people who don't deserve it are going to be hurt by them.

Besides, none of this will stop anyone who wants a gun regardless of the rules from obtaining one.

Only the law-abiding will suffer, and they are likely not going to be a problem in the first place.

22
posted on 04/10/2013 12:08:38 AM PDT
by Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)

The real issue with SSRI's is most doctors prescribing it do not know about a rare but very mind altering adverse reaction called Serotonin Syndrome. It can be triggered because it could be the wrong anxiety medication especially if neurological damage issues is causing the anxiety. Also something as simple as OTC cold medications taken with SSRI's can trigger it. What impact can it have on the persons mind? From what I saw happen I would say about like giving the person a strong haluciantiogentic.

Most doctors thanks to media scaremongering are scared to write scripts Benzodiazapenes especially long term. Anxiety can have many origins including phobic, neurological, and chemical origins. Each origin requires a different medication class. Not doing so is wreaking havoc in patients lives. The danger here with SSRI's is the doctors are not educating the patient and family enough about things too look for including believe it or not bladder blockage in males. Yea SSRI's can do that also. A Benzo is out of your bloodstream in less than 24 hours with most of them. SSRI's can stay in your system for weeks. What I am talking about is a rare but possible reaction.

23
posted on 04/10/2013 12:28:19 AM PDT
by cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)

If anyone has ever had a prescription for any kind of psychotropic drug, it will probably be used against you sooner or later to deny 2nd Amendment rights. Larry Pratt warned us about this a few years ago.

I think you may have nailed the problem, in that the Doctors prescribing the drugs do not know the pharmacology or the patient well enough (or both), and are failing to educate the patient and family sufficiently.

When you consider that there are probably tens of thousands of people who do not have major adverse effects from the drugs versus the few who do, (and keeping in mind we do not know what forms of self-medication people may have added to their systems), the people who have a violent psychotic moment and end up becoming mass murderers are likely a rare segment of the total population taking the drugs.

In this case, the question is one of correlation, causation, or both, and that determination is made more problematical by the underlying conditions which led to the prescription in the first place.

Unfortunately, the high profile crimes that those few commit are very destructive, at least in the case of those we do hear about.

Admittedly, we are dealing with a skewed data set, in that people who are prescribed these drugs who do not have complications or interactions just don't make the news.

That is the specific reason I don't like blanket suppositions based on pharmacological history.

Furthermore, if people can be deprived of a right because they have had a problem, one of the effects of that will be to deter people who should seek help for a small problem until it becomes far more difficult to manage. Additionally, the bar can be raised at the whim of the medical and psych establishment at any time. The effect is that a fundamental right lies at the mercy of people who have been known to follow political agendae in the past, while ignoring sound science to do so.

27
posted on 04/10/2013 1:35:09 AM PDT
by Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)

“I think you may have nailed the problem, in that the Doctors prescribing the drugs do not know the pharmacology or the patient well enough (or both), and are failing to educate the patient and family sufficiently.”

I totally agree with you. A good example is to try and understand the psychopharmacology of the atypical antipsychotics.

This is what the NRA and GOA must keep harping on. Allowing background checks will bring gun registration. Registration brings confiscation. HIPPA laws were there to keep everything quiet so we could allow the government to digitize our health records. Now they can thumb through them at their leisure. Background checks will do no good if they don’t know who has what.

My personal experience has been that the vestibular and occular processing problems are often psychologically based.

Nope just the opposite. Vestibular and optical disorders can trigger anxiety. Anxiety is a secondary symptom. Many doctors don't do extensive enough medical histories. A guy made the link to Cerebellar/Vestibular induced anxiety and even ADD ADHD back in the 1970's. His name is Harold Levison. His book Phobia Free describes it. I was born one eye functional. I have vision in both eyes never at the same time. My eye/muscle coordination has always been off. So much so I had to take Occupational Therapy to walk a straight line. What controls balance? The Inner Ear.

I can go into a place like Walmart or Home Depot and I can pick out the persons who have this and don't even realize it. P> BTW Vestibular disorders seem to run in families. I also had as a toddler and still have severe sinus allergies. That too is linked to Vestibular Damage. I'm now over 50% deaf in both ears. The older General Practitioners understood some of this stuff. My eye issues were caught when I was about 7. But I had other sensory symptoms from as far back as Toddler. If you want to check back this evening and I'll post some links from some credible sources.

31
posted on 04/10/2013 2:00:40 AM PDT
by cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)

The mental health profession specifically psychiatrist's need to get their minds out of the 1950’s and start considering newer research from even other sources outside mental health. Right now kids are having Ritaling crammed down their throats for a disorder which is not ADD ADHD but rather C.A.P.D. and requires no medications.

33
posted on 04/10/2013 2:08:22 AM PDT
by cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)

The Affordable Care Act will consolidate all medical records in a digital repository. It will be a simple name/SSN cross reference to find out who has been prescribed ooga-booga drugs. Look for all sorts of unintended (intended on their part) consequences....

I’ll go for that. Today’s school-based diagnosis of this and a suggested accompanying prescription of behavior control medicine like Ritalin used as a control crutch in schools could end up with very, very unintended consequences.

This is the reason that cramming Obamacare down our throats was essential to the Marxist democrats.

It is the portal for every vile and unConstitutional thing they have in store for us. It is the portal, so to speak. They now have access to your medical records, bank accounts and have their “doctors” and “neighbors” acting as informants.

People should make sure they keep an eye on their medical records because things could easily be planted on those records.

46
posted on 04/10/2013 4:26:20 AM PDT
by dforest
(I have now entered the Twilight Zone.)

Sleep disorders here. Doc gave me Ambien. I quit walking in my sleep in my late Twenties. Ambien brought it back, big time. Almost burnt down my house sleep cooking."

There was an article on FR some time ago about a lady in San Antonio who was on Ambien. She had a few drinks before taking it an going to bed. She got in her car, hit someone head-on and killed the driver. She had no clue she was even on the road.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.